If someone starts banging on about "equivalence" (again), I will shoot a puppy.

^^^ FR...it seems that I keep running outta likes at the most inopportune moments!

Most all cameras have their limitations , one reason for the many lens options , I think your design a camera idea is great , but never will come to fruition so we all have to be marginalised by what is available , sad but true in respects.

I have embellished myself in a few designs and frankly I am still at a loss , I do think that it is just consumerism though and while the new advancements are sure to have all of those wanting new and exciting developments , me included , I don't believe that hype and megapixels will improve my skills.

Getting to understand the Camera you are using is paramount to the end result that you deliver , and if your ability exceeds the constraints of the machine then it is time to move on and upgrade I believe .

I am still in the learning stages of photography and I have not given up yet , the confusing issues have been for me the want or desire to let the camera show the end result , this is detrimental to the cause !

For me it does not matter how many pixels or how much DR the camera has primarily , the ability to be able to compose an image is fundamental .

Ok pixels are great but I am not a professional , I don't believe ever will be , and as a bonus we all can post produce to get what we see as being a good image .

Maybe this is just a lot of wind to you guys , and not pertinent to the topic , it is just my take on it .

It's about handling, AF speed and shutter lag. If the thing doesn't sit right in you hand, if it focuses too slowly and when you press the shutter button it takes an age to decide what to do . . . you lose the moment. However mighty the sensor might be, unless you capture the image you want in that split second, the sensor isn't worth a damn.

This is what I've found with the A7r. Which is a shame because the controls you can get used to and change fairly quickly and the WSIWYG of the EVF is supreme.

Really I'd just like one camera, one which not only pulls off landscape and studio but action (or at least some motion) too, as well as being vaguely low light capable. At ISO6400 the colour noise in the A7r RAW files is ghastly. Pixel density is too high. Perhaps 24mp is best for full frame and 16mp the optimum for crop format, with 50mp for the crop version of medium format.

It's about handling, AF speed and shutter lag. If the thing doesn't sit right in you hand, if it focuses too slowly and when you press the shutter button it takes an age to decide what to do . . . you lose the moment. However mighty the sensor might be, unless you capture the image you want in that split second, the sensor isn't worth a damn.

+1 +1 +1

Some wisdom on the subject by Ming Thein:

http://blog.mingthein.com/2015/02/08/oped-resolution-output-collector-or-photographer/

Just had a new concrete crusher delivered to site on trial to buy. Only £242,000 with the advanced mag belt. Anyway, which camera and lens did I grab to do the shoot? . . . why the Pentax K-3 with Pentax-DA15/4 Limited of course.

It dawned on me the reason I did so grab this camera rather than the A7r was all about confidence. Handling, AF, shutter response, metering . . . ISO not past 320. Perfect. Does the job and we're not printing for billboards here.

I would show you the results but my computer just blew a graphics card and I'm still waiting on the new one.

Most all cameras have their limitations , one reason for the many lens options , I think your design a camera idea is great , but never will come to fruition so we all have to be marginalised by what is available , sad but true in respects.

I have embellished myself in a few designs and frankly I am still at a loss , I do think that it is just consumerism though and while the new advancements are sure to have all of those wanting new and exciting developments , me included , I don't believe that hype and megapixels will improve my skills.

Getting to understand the Camera you are using is paramount to the end result that you deliver , and if your ability exceeds the constraints of the machine then it is time to move on and upgrade I believe .

I am still in the learning stages of photography and I have not given up yet , the confusing issues have been for me the want or desire to let the camera show the end result , this is detrimental to the cause !

For me it does not matter how many pixels or how much DR the camera has primarily , the ability to be able to compose an image is fundamental .

Ok pixels are great but I am not a professional , I don't believe ever will be , and as a bonus we all can post produce to get what we see as being a good image .

Maybe this is just a lot of wind to you guys , and not pertinent to the topic , it is just my take on it .

It's about handling, AF speed and shutter lag. If the thing doesn't sit right in you hand, if it focuses too slowly and when you press the shutter button it takes an age to decide what to do . . . you lose the moment. However mighty the sensor might be, unless you capture the image you want in that split second, the sensor isn't worth a damn.

This is what I've found with the A7r. Which is a shame because the controls you can get used to and change fairly quickly and the WSIWYG of the EVF is supreme.

Really I'd just like one camera, one which not only pulls off landscape and studio but action (or at least some motion) too, as well as being vaguely low light capable. At ISO6400 the colour noise in the A7r RAW files is ghastly. Pixel density is too high. Perhaps 24mp is best for full frame and 16mp the optimum for crop format, with 50mp for the crop version of medium format.

Interesting comments - do you think the A7 is any better as an all-rounder? I think the A7R was a specialist landscape tool?

Just had a new concrete crusher delivered to site on trial to buy. Only £242,000 with the advanced mag belt. Anyway, which camera and lens did I grab to do the shoot? . . . why the Pentax K-3 with Pentax-DA15/4 Limited of course.

It dawned on me the reason I did so grab this camera rather than the A7r was all about confidence. Handling, AF, shutter response, metering . . . ISO not past 320. Perfect. Does the job and we're not printing for billboards here.

I would show you the results but my computer just blew a graphics card and I'm still waiting on the new one.

I know what you mean - I'm still clinging to my old Lumix G2 with it's first generation sensor because I'm confident I can make it do what I want it to do and I can work around it's limitations. But an ISO limit of 200 (800 at a push) is a problem - but I don't think it's 12 MP senor is enough reason to change.

I'd avoid the A7r completely. It's a great sensor, ruined by a poorly designed camera and partly the lossy RAW compression.

I reckon the A7II is definitely worth a look as a better all rounder.